NEW DELHI, Sept 12: In a ruling that could set India’s political agenda in an election year, the supreme court on Friday asked Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi to quit if he was not able to prosecute the guilty in last year’s communal carnage.

Hearing the petitions in the Best Bakery case, in which a Hindu mob lynched 14 Muslims, including women and children, the court said it did not trust the Gujarat government and its prosecution to bring the rioters to book.

Chief Justice V.N. Khare, Justice Brijesh Kumar and Justice S.B. Sinha, said: “What is the Rajdharma (sacred duty) of government? You quit if you cannot prosecute guilty.”

When the state’s attorney sought to stress that Mr Modi’s government was democratically elected, Justice Khare said: “Democracy does not mean you will not prosecute anyone.”

Friday’s strictures pertain to an evidently facile appeal the Gujarat government had moved against the exoneration by a lower court of all the 21 accused in the Best Bakery case. The government did so to pre-empt strictures about allowing the guilty to escape unpunished.

However, ignoring pleas of the Gujarat government’s counsel that it would amend its prayers and grounds in the appeal before the Gujarat high court, the supreme court (SC) directed the state’s chief secretary and the director general of police to appear before it on Sept 19.

The judges also suggested that the federal government could consider appointing an independent agency to investigate major cases of carnage.

Taking Mr Modi’s defence to task, the SC asked: “Is this an appeal? Even a counsel with one-year experience will not draft such an appeal.

“It appears to us that it is an eyewash. It is just an eyewash and nothing else. We will not be silent spectators. We will act if the state keeps silent before the high court.”

The comments came when the counsel for the National Human Right Commission (NHRC) pointed out how the appeal before the high court did not even seek a fresh trial in the case despite the trial court pointing out gaping holes in the prosecution’s story.

Of the 43 witnesses in the case, 37 had turned hostile, resulting in the acquittal of all the 21 accused.

Criticizing the manner in which the prosecution conducted itself in the trial proceedings, the court said: “There is no cross-examination as to why witnesses turned hostile and this shows the nature of the prosecution.

“We do not have any trust in your prosecution agency. There appears to be some collusion between government and prosecution and it is a case where 14 people were burnt alive.”

The chief justice said: “What impression one will get if one sees this appeal filed in the high court.”

Appearing for the state, Additional Solicitor General Mukul Rohtagi requested the court to adjourn the matter so that the government could amend the petition in the high court.

However, the court said: “The way you have conducted prosecution before the high court and the way you have filed the appeal, it appears to us that the same thing will be repeated.”

Mr Prashant Bhushan, a senior lawyer in the case, said the court was incensed by the attitude of the Gujarat government.

Mr Bhushan has represented the victims of the violence, in which more than 2,000 Muslims were killed following the death of 54 Hindu activists in a separate carnage suspected to be the handiwork of Muslim extremists.

The Congress party immediately demanded Mr Modi’s resignation. But the rightwing Hindu Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) sought to downplay the court’s observations.

“The court has not said anything indicting the state government. The court has said Gujarat government should quit if it cannot punish the rioters. This is applicable to all governments,” RSS spokesman Ram Madhav said in Delhi.

Congress spokesman Jaipal Reddy held the opposite view, saying: “Prime Minister Vajpayee should follow Rajdharma and impose president’s rule in the state after the Supreme Court judgment. Though Vajpayee is himself an RSS man, when he is following Rajdharma he must rise above his party affiliations.” He said the supreme court had called the Gujarat government’s bluff.